November 15, 2017 Project No. 17H-0152-0 Mr. Will Washburn, P.E. Peters Engineering Group 952 Pollasky Avenue Clovis, California 93612 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Report Cartmill Avenue Improvements Between Akers and De La Vina Streets Tulare, California

Dear Mr. Washburn: In accordance with your request, we have performed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project. The results of our geotechnical investigation are presented in the accompanying report, which includes a description of site conditions and potential geologic hazards, results of our field exploration and laboratory testing, conclusions, and recommendations. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service to you. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact us at your convenience. Respectfully submitted,

RMA GeoScience, Inc.

Megan J. Stewart Staff Geologist

George P. Hattrup, PE|GE Principal Geotechnical Engineer Distribution: Addressee (4 Originals and one pdf copy to wwashburn@peters-engineering.com)

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT CARTMILL AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN AKERS AND DE LA VINA STREETS TULARE, CALIFORNIA

for

Peters Engineering Group 952 Pollasky Avenue

Clovis, California 93612

November 15, 2017

Project No. 17H-0152-0

Table of Contents

1.00 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.01 Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.02 Scope of the Investigation ................................................................................................... 1 1.03 Site Location and Description .............................................................................................. 1 1.04 Planned Improvements ....................................................................................................... 3 1.05 Investigation Methods and Limitation ................................................................................ 3

2.00 Findings ................................................................................................................................................. 3 2.01 Geologic Setting .................................................................................................................. 3 2.02 Existing Pavement Sections ................................................................................................. 5 2.03 Earth Materials .................................................................................................................... 5 2.04 Expansive Soil ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.05 Surface and Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................. 6 2.06 Faults and Seismic Design Parameters ................................................................................ 6

3.00 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................................... 7 3.01 General Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 7 3.02 Earthwork Recommendations ............................................................................................. 8 3.03 Rippability and Rock Disposal .............................................................................................. 9 3.04 Earthwork Shrinkage ........................................................................................................... 9 3.05 Imported Fill Material .......................................................................................................... 9 3.06 Temporary Slopes and Shoring ......................................................................................... 10 3.07 Utility Trench Backfill ......................................................................................................... 11 3.08 Signal and Light Pole Foundations ..................................................................................... 12 3.09 Lateral Load Resistance ..................................................................................................... 12 3.10 Miscellaneous Concrete Flatwork ..................................................................................... 12 3.11 Cement Type and Corrosion Potential .............................................................................. 13 3.12 Pavement Sections ............................................................................................................ 14 3.13 Plan Review ....................................................................................................................... 15 3.14 Geotechnical Observation and Testing During Grading .................................................... 15 3.15 Post-Grading Geotechnical Observation and Testing ....................................................... 15

4.0 Closure ................................................................................................................................................... 16

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Map Figures 2A & 2B Boring Location Maps APPENDICES

Appendix A Field Investigation Appendix B Laboratory Tests Appendix C References

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page i

1.00 Introduction

1.01 Purpose

A geotechnical investigation has been completed for the planned Cartmill Avenue Improvements located between Akers Street and De La Vina Street in Tulare, California. The purpose of the investigation was to summarize geotechnical and geologic conditions at the site, to assess their potential impact on the proposed roadway and utility improvements, and to develop geotechnical engineering design parameters. 1.02 Scope of the Investigation

The general scope of this investigation included the following:

• Review of published and unpublished geologic, seismic, groundwater and geotechnical literature.

• Examination of aerial photographs and topographic maps.

• Contacting of underground service alert to locate onsite utilities.

• Sampling, logging, and backfilling of nine exploratory borings to a maximum depth of 21 feet.

• Laboratory testing of representative soil samples.

• Geotechnical evaluation of the compiled data.

• Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions and recommendations.

Our scope of work did not include a preliminary site assessment for the potential of hazardous materials onsite. 1.03 Site Location and Description

The project site lies along Cartmill Avenue from Akers Street in the west to De La Vina Street in the east in Tulare, California, as indicated on Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map. The length of the project alignment is approximately one mile (5,400 feet). The geographic position near the center of the alignment is 36.2403° north latitude and 119.3310° west longitude. At the time of our field exploration on July 21, 2017, Cartmill Avenue between Akers Street and De La Vina Street was a two lane AC paved roadway with paved shoulders west of Retherford Street. The project site lies within an agricultural area just east of SR-99; however, there is an existing residential development southeast of Cartmill Avenue and Hillman Street. The elevation above mean sea level along the project alignment ranges from approximately 292 feet (west end) to 298 feet (east end) based on Google Earth data.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 1

Field photo taken just east of the intersection of Cartmill Avenue and Akers Street facing west. The overpass of CA-99 is

pictured in the background. Photo taken on June 13, 2017.

Field photo taken north of the intersection of Cartmill Avenue and De La Vina Street facing east (boring B-9 pictured).

Photo taken on June 13, 2017.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 2

1.04 Planned Improvements

Based on information provided by Peters Engineering Group, the planned improvements include the construction of a new asphalt concrete road with sewer, water, and storm drain installations. The new roadway will consist of a four-lane divided street with left-turn pockets at the intersecting streets. The invert elevation of new storm drain and sewer improvements is expected to be less than 12 feet deep along the project alignment. 1.05 Investigation Methods and Limitation

Our investigation consisted of office research, field exploration, laboratory testing, review of the compiled data, and preparation of this report. It has been performed in a manner consistent with generally accepted engineering and geologic principles and practices, and has incorporated applicable requirements of the California Building Code. Definitions of technical terms and symbols used in this report include those of the ASTM International, the California Building Code, and commonly used geologic nomenclature. Technical supporting data are presented in the attached appendices. Appendix A presents a description of the methods and equipment used in performing the field exploration, as well as logs of our subsurface exploration. Appendix B presents a description of our laboratory testing and the test results. Finally, references are presented in Appendix C.

2.00 Findings

2.01 Geologic Setting

The subject site is located in the south-central San Joaquin Valley, which comprises the southern half of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The valley is a westward-titling trough which forms a broad alluvial fan, approximately 200 miles long and 50 to 70 miles wide, where the eastern flank is broad and gently inclined, as opposed to the western flank which is relatively narrow (Bartow, 1991; Page, 1968). The Central Valley consists of the Great Valley Sequence, overlain by Cenozoic alluvium. Underlying the Great Valley Sequence are the Franciscan Assemblage to the west and the Sierra Nevada batholith to the east (Bailey, Irwin, and Jones, 1964). The Franciscan Assemblage, made up of deformed and high pressure and low temperature metamorphosed mafic and ultramafic rocks, was formed around the Late Jurassic through the Miocene (160 to about 20 million years ago) by the offscraping of rocks from a subducting plate dipping to the east (Wakabayashi, 1992; Wakabayashi, 2010). The Sierra Nevada started to form during the Early Jurassic (around 200 million years ago) when the Farallon Plate began subducting under the North American Plate. This subduction resulted in several orogenies, or mountain building events, that created the granitic Sierra Nevada Batholith deep below the surface. During the Miocene (around 10 million years ago), vertical movement along the Sierra Nevada Frontal Fault Zone (part of the Eastern California Shear Zone) began to uplift the Sierra Nevada. This uplift and erosion exposed the

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 3

batholiths to the surface. From the Pleistocene (commonly known as the last Ice Age) to the present, glaciers have been carving out many parts of the Sierras. The current uplift of the Sierra Nevada is 1 - 2mm per year (Hammond, et al. 2012). The Great Valley Sequence is a 40,000 foot sequence of marine shale, sandstone, and conglomerate beds, deposited in a deep marine environment during the Late Jurassic through the Cretaceous (150 – 65 million years ago). Overlying the Great Valley Sequence is several thousand feet of Cenozoic alluvium, deposited by: streams and rivers draining from the mountains and creating alluvial fans; by lakes that covered parts of the valley floor from time to time; flooding; and marsh environments (Page, 1986). In some places, it is thousands of feet thick, and more than half of this thickness is composed of fine grained fluvial and lacustrine deposits. Holocene deposition consists mainly of episodic deposition of alluvial sediments (Bartow, 1991; Page, 1986). The project site is situated on Quaternary fan deposits that are several thousand feet deep.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 4

Geologic map showing the locations of Cenozoic alluvium/fill (yellow) overlying the Great Valley Sequence (green), the

Franciscan Assemblage (blue), and the Sierra Nevada Batholith (red). Modified from: Irwin (1990).

Geologic block diagram of California. From: Harden (2004). Not to scale.

2.02 Existing Pavement Sections

Four of the test borings were located within the existing paved right-of-way. The existing pavement section at these boring locations are summarized in the following table.

Thickness of Existing Pavement Sections

Boring No. Approximate

Location AC (inches) AB (inches)

B-2 17+50, 50' R 7.5 7.5

B-4 29+85, 30' R 4 9

B-6 44+80, 7' L 8 6

B-8 58+00, 2' R 4.5 7

2.03 Earth Materials

The soils encountered in the test borings consisted of primarily of fine to medium grained silty sand, which was underlain by relatively clean, fine to medium or fine to coarse grained sand at Borings B-4 (below 6.5'), B-6 (below 6.5'), B-7 (below 3.5'), and B-8 (below 7.5'). In addition, at Boring B-1 a silty clay layer was encountered at a depth of 15 to 18.5 feet. The consistency of the silty sand and sand layers was medium dense, except for a relatively loose zone of silty sand encountered in B-4 between a depth of approximately 4 and 6.5 feet. As indicated above, the soils encountered in the test borings are related to alluvial deposits that have been deposited in the central San Joaquin Valley over the past several thousand years.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 5

Boring Location Maps, presented as Figures 2A and 2B, show the approximate locations of the test borings. Logs of our exploratory borings are presented in Appendix A, which provided more detailed information of the soils that were encountered to depths drilled (11 to 21 feet) along the project alignment. 2.04 Expansive Soil

Our field exploration and laboratory testing program indicate that near surface soils have a very low expansion potential and have moderate to good stability characteristics. Results of the laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. 2.05 Surface and Groundwater Conditions

Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration. No areas of ponding or standing water along the proposed roadway alignment were observed at the time of our study, and no seepage was observed in the exploratory borings to the maximum depth explored of 21 feet below existing ground surface. According to groundwater data that is available at the California Department of Water Resource website, recent ground water data indicates the depth to ground water is approximately 160 feet in the vicinity of the project site. Historical data derived from a well (State Well ID 19S24E36C001M) located to the southwest of the intersection of Cartmill Avenue and De La Vina Street, indicates the depth to ground water on average was approximately 75 feet deep throughout the 1970’s and then declined to a depth of approximately 100 during the 1990’s. Over the subsequent years, the data indicates that the groundwater elevation has declined another 60 feet. 2.06 Faults and Seismic Design Parameters

The project alignment is not located in the vicinity of any known active or potentially active fault zones. The nearest active earthquake fault zones (evidence of displacement within the past 11,700 years) are the Kern Canyon Fault Zone, Nunez Fault, and the San Andreas Fault Zone, located approximately, 51 miles east, 63 miles west, and 80 miles west, respectively, of the project site. Seismic design parameters have been developed in accordance with Section 1613 of the 2016 California Building Code (CBC) using the online U.S. Geological Survey Seismic Design Maps Calculator (ASCE 7-10 Standard) and a site location based on latitude and longitude. The calculator generates probabilistic and deterministic maximum considered earthquake spectral parameters represented by a 5-percent damped acceleration response spectrum having a 2-percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. The deterministic response accelerations are calculated as 150 percent of the largest median 5-percent damped spectral response acceleration computed on active faults within a region, where the deterministic values govern. The calculator does not, however, produce separate probabilistic and deterministic results. The parameters generated for the subject site are presented below:

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 6

2016 California Building Code (CBC) Seismic Parameters

Parameter Value

Site Location Latitude = 36.2403 degrees Longitude = -119.3310 degrees

Site Class Site Class = D Soil Profile Name = Stiff Soil

Mapped Spectral Accelerations Ss (0.2- second period) = 0.584g S1 (1-second period) = 0.251g

Site Coefficients (Site Class D)

Fa = 1.3033 Fv = 1.898

Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Accelerations (Site Class D)

SMS (0.2- second period) = 0.778g SM1 (1-second period) = 0.476g

Design Earthquake Spectral Accelerations (Site Class D)

SDS (0.2- second period) = 0.519g SD1 (1-second period) = 0.318g

According to CBC Section 1613.3 and based on the spectral response acceleration parameters SDS and SD1 indicated above, the Seismic Design Category is D (CBC Table 1604.5 and Section 1613.5.6) for all Risk Categories. Based on our subsurface exploration and our knowledge of the geologic setting, there is no significant risk of ground rupture, liquefaction, lateral spreading, or seismic settlement that is expected to occur at the subject site during a design-level seismic event.

3.00 Conclusions and Recommendations

3.01 General Conclusions

Based on specific data and information contained in this report, our understanding of the project, and our geotechnical engineering experience, it is our professional judgment that the proposed access road and parking lot are geologically and geotechnically feasible. Our review of geological literature and the field exploration performed for this project did not indicate any unusual conditions at the site that would entail special design considerations or construction procedures. However, zones of relatively clean sand were encountered in the upper 10 feet at four of the nine test borings that were drilled along the project alignment (see Section 3.06 and the boring logs in Appendix A). Although the clean sand will provide a good bedding material for the new pipeline(s), it will be prone to sloughing or caving in open excavations. No groundwater or seepage was observed in the test borings; therefore, it is unlikely that saturated soils and/or potential groundwater seepage will affect trench excavations that are made to install underground utilities. In addition, the soils within the upper 10 feet may be considered to have a low to very low expansion potential for design purposes. Specific geotechnical recommendations are presented below to address the soil conditions at the site and provide information for other members of the design team to prepare the project plans and specifications for the planned roadway and utility improvements.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 7

3.02 Earthwork Recommendations

The following procedures should be implemented during site preparation and earthwork grading for the proposed roadway improvements. It should be noted that all references to maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, and relative compaction are based on CTM 216 or ASTM D 1557 laboratory test procedures.

Within the area of the planned roadway improvements, trash, debris, and the near-surface soils containing vegetation, roots, or other objectionable organic matter should be stripped to expose a clean soil surface. In addition, at locations where trees are removed, tree roots will need to be removed or grubbed out and properly disposed of so they are not mixed into over-excavated soils that will be used as engineered fill. Materials resulting from stripping and grubbing operations should be removed from the site and properly disposed. The stripped and grubbed surfaces should be reviewed and approved by the Project Geotechnical Engineer prior to placing compacted fill. In areas where the existing pavement section will be removed to construct the new roadway, asphalt concrete (AC) grindings and aggregate base (AB) can be segregated from the underlying soil and used as fill material. In this case, the AC grindings must meet the following gradation requirement:

Sieve Size

Percent Passing

3" 100

1" 80 - 100

No. 4 35 - 75

No. 10 20 - 60 If AC grindings or reclaimed AB will be used as Class 2 AB to construct new pavement sections (see Section 3.12), samples must be obtained and tested to verify the material meets the requirements of Class 2 AB as specified in Section 26 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications, latest edition. After the removal of any surface organics, other deleterious material, or existing pavement sections, the underlying soils must be over-excavated at least 12 inches below the stripped surface or finished subgrade surface, whichever is lower. The stripped and/or over-excavated ground surface in all areas determined to be satisfactory for the support of fills must be scarified to a minimum depth of 8 inches. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free from lumps or clods and until the scarified zone is uniform. The moisture content of the scarified zone shall be adjusted to at least the optimum moisture content. The scarified zone must then be uniformly compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Removed and/or over-excavated soils free of organics and other deleterious material may be used as engineered fill along with reclaimed AB and AC grindings as indicated above. Fill material should be placed in nearly horizontal layers, uniformly moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture content, and then compacted in layers that do not exceed approximately 6 inches in thickness. Thicker lifts may be placed if testing

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 8

indicates the compaction procedures are such that the required compaction is being achieved and the geotechnical consultant approves their use. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to insure uniformity of material in each layer. Engineered fill must be compacted to achieve a relative compaction of at least 90 percent except for the upper 12 inches of subgrade below asphalt or concrete pavement sections subject to vehicular traffic, which must be compacted to at least 95 percent. The above recommendations are based on the assumption that soils encountered during field exploration are representative of soils throughout the site. However, there can be unforeseen and unanticipated variations in soils between points of subsurface exploration. Hence, over-excavation depths must be verified, and adjusted if necessary, at the time of grading. 3.03 Rippability and Rock Disposal

Our exploratory borings were advanced without difficulty and no oversize materials were encountered in our subsurface investigation. Accordingly, we expect that excavations can be made using conventional construction equipment and oversized materials are not expected. 3.04 Earthwork Shrinkage

Shrinkage is the decrease in volume of soil upon removal and recompaction, or scarifying and recompacting, expressed as a percentage of the original in-place volume. Based on our observations of the existing field conditions and lab testing data, a shrinkage factor in the range of 10 to 15 percent is considered applicable for over-excavated or recompacted soils outside of the existing paved areas. The degree to which fill soils are compacted and variations in the insitu density of existing soils will influence earth volume changes. Consequently, some adjustments in grades near the completion of grading could be required to balance the earthwork. 3.05 Imported Fill Material

Imported fill materials must be non-hazardous and be obtained from a single, uniform source that meets the following criteria:

Maximum Particle Size: 3 inches

Percent Passing 3/4 inch Sieve: 90% - 100%

Percent Passing #4 Sieve: 65% - 100%

Percent Passing #200 Sieve: 20% - 50%

Minimum R-Value: 30 (for upper 12" of subgrade below pavement sections)

Soluble Sulfates < 1,000 mg/kg

Soluble Chlorides < 200 mg/kg

Minimum Soils Resistivity > 3,000 ohm-cm (unless other requirement established by Design Engineer)

pH in the range of 6.0 to 8.5

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 9

3.06 Temporary Slopes and Shoring

Our geotechnical investigation indicates that excavations less than 5 feet in depth may generally be constructed with vertical sidewalls without shoring or shielding unless relatively clean sand is encountered at a shallower depth. Temporary excavations in existing alluvial soils or fill material that are deeper than 5 feet may be safely made at an inclination of 1:1 or flatter. If vertical sidewalls are required in excavations greater than 5 feet in depth, the use of cantilevered or braced shoring is recommended. The following geotechnical parameters can be used to design a shoring system:

Moist Unit Weight of Soils: 120 pcf Angle of Internal Friction (Ø): 32° Cohesion: 0 psf Zones of relatively clean sand, which could be prone to caving or sloughing into open excavations, were encountered in our test borings at the locations indicated in the following table.

Location of Relatively Clean Sand Layers

Boring No.

Approximate Location

Approximate Depth of Sand Layers (feet)

B-4 29+85, 30' R 6.5 to 11

B-6 44+80, 7' L 6.5 to 11

B-7 50+60, 35' R 3.5 to 11

B-8 58+00, 2' R 7.5 to 11.5 Based on our test borings, it appears that sand layers within the upper 12 feet are more prevalent along the project alignment east of Station 27+00 than they are to the west of this station. However, layers or isolated zones of sand may be present west of Station 27+00, which were not apparent in Borings B-1, B-2, or B-3. Unless vehicles, equipment, materials, etc., are kept a minimum distance equal to the height of the excavation away from the edge of shored excavations, a surcharge load equal to a uniform lateral pressure of 72 psf should be assumed to act on the shoring in addition to the earth pressure calculated using the geotechnical parameters given above. Vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. should be set back a minimum distance of 10 feet from the top edge of sloped or vertical excavations. Surface waters should be diverted away from temporary excavations and prevented from draining over the top of the excavation and down the slope face. During periods of heavy rain, the slope face should be protected with sandbags to prevent drainage over the edge of the slope, and a plastic liner placed on the slope face to prevent erosion of the slope face.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 10

Periodic observations of the excavations should be made by the geotechnical consultant to verify that the soil conditions have not varied from those anticipated and to monitor the overall condition of the temporary excavations over time. If at any time during construction conditions are encountered which differ from those anticipated, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted and allowed to analyze the field conditions prior to commencing work within the excavation. Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work. 3.07 Utility Trench Backfill

Other than the relatively clean sand zones indicated above, the onsite soils will generally not be suitable for use as pipe bedding for buried utilities. All pipes should be bedded in sand or other suitable material as specified by the Project Civil Engineer and/or as specified by the pipe/conduit manufacturer. We recommend the bedding material have a Sand Equivalent (SE) of at least 30 and have less than 8 percent, by weight, passing the #200 Sieve. Bedding materials should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction (ASTM D1557) by mechanical methods. The geotechnical consultant should review and approve proposed bedding materials prior to use. The on-site soils are expected to be suitable as trench backfill provided they are screened of organic matter and other deleterious material. Trench backfill must be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction (ASTM D1557) and the upper 24 inches of trench backfill beneath pavement sections subject to vehicular traffic should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. Trench backfill should be compacted using mechanical methods; no jetting of backfill should be allowed. A minimum trench width of 24 inches or 18 inches plus the diameter of the utility line, whichever is greater, should be provided to permit uniform compaction on both sides of utility line and allow for a technician to perform in-place density tests. If narrower trenches are desired, a sand-cement slurry should be used to backfill the trenches to within 8 inches of the top of trench. The sand-cement slurry should contain at least 2 sacks of cement per yard of mix and have a 4- to 6-inch slump. In addition, slurry should be consolidated using a suitable vibratory or mechanical method. All utility trench backfill within street right of ways, utility easements, under or adjacent to sidewalks, driveways, or building pads should be observed and tested by the geotechnical consultant to verify proper compaction. Trenches excavated adjacent to foundations should not extend within the footing influence zone defined as the area within a line projected at a 1:1 drawn from the bottom edge of the footing. Trenches crossing perpendicular to foundations should be excavated and backfilled prior to the construction of the foundations. The excavations should be backfilled in the presence of the geotechnical engineer and tested to verify adequate compaction beneath the proposed footing. Where utility crossings are located within 12 inches of bottoms of footings, conduits should be wrapped with polystyrene foam or other suitable material with a minimum thickness of one inch. Conduits extending through footings shall be “sleeved” as determined by the Project Structural Engineer.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 11

3.08 Signal and Light Pole Foundations

Foundations for signal and light pole foundations should be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable Caltrans Standard Plans. No modifications will be required to the depth or diameter of cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) pile foundations indicated on the standard plans due to soil conditions at the project site. Prior to placing the reinforcing steel and concrete, loose or disturbed soils should be removed from CIDH pile excavations. A representative of the Geotechnical or Resident Engineer should observe the drilling and clean-out associated with the construction of pier foundations in order to assess whether the actual bearing conditions are compatible with the conditions anticipated during the preparation of this report. As indicated in previous sections of this report, test borings indicate that zones of relatively clean sand are present within the upper 10 feet along segments of the project alignment. Therefore, the contractor should be prepared to take measures to prevent caving or significant sloughing of CIDH sidewalls (such as temporary casing) from occurring during the drilling and installation of reinforcing steel and concrete. In any case, reinforcing steel and concrete should be installed in an expeditious manner after each drilled hole is cleaned out. The contractor must take responsibility for staging the installation of CIDH piles so that significant amounts of sloughing or caving do not occur prior to installing the reinforcing steel and concrete. 3.09 Lateral Load Resistance

Lateral loads, such as those acting on thrust blocks, may be resisted by soil friction and the passive resistance of the soil. The following parameters are recommended.

• Allowable Passive Earth Pressure = 200 pcf (equivalent fluid weight, includes a factor of safety = 2.0)

• Allowable Coefficient of Friction (soil to footing) = 0.4 (includes a factor of safety = 1.5)

• Retaining structure should be designed to resist a lateral active earth pressure of 38 pcf (equivalent fluid weight) for a level, non-expansive backfill with drainage provided.

The active earth pressure provided above is only applicable if the retained earth is allowed to strain sufficiently to achieve the active state. The required minimum horizontal strain to achieve the active state is approximately 0.0025H. Retaining structures should be designed to resist an at-rest lateral earth pressure of 58 pcf (equivalent fluid weight) if this horizontal strain cannot be achieved. 3.10 Miscellaneous Concrete Flatwork

Miscellaneous concrete flatwork and walkways may be designed with a minimum thickness of 4 inches. Large slabs should be reinforced with a minimum of #4 rebar spaced 24 inches on center in both directions placed at mid-height in the slab. Control joints should be constructed to create squares or rectangles with a maximum spacing of 12 feet. The Project Civil Engineer should provide design details and specifications for all exterior concrete flatwork including the concrete mix design, reinforcement, and the location of construction and control joints. We recommend walkways be separated from foundations with a thick expansion joint filler.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 12

The subgrade soils beneath all miscellaneous concrete flatwork should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction for a minimum depth of 8 inches. The minimum relative compaction should be increased to 95 percent in areas where vehicular traffic is anticipated. The geotechnical engineer should monitor the compaction of the subgrade soils and perform testing to verify that proper compaction has been obtained. 3.11 Cement Type and Corrosion Potential

The results of a tests performed on two samples of soil obtained from the project site indicate the soluble sulfate content is in the range of 68.3 to 126.0 mg/kg (0.000683 to 0.00126 percent by weight). Thus, below-grade concrete at the subject site should have a negligible exposure to water-soluble sulfate in the soil. Our recommendations for concrete exposed to soils containing various concentrations of soluble sulfate are presented in the table below.

Recommendations for Concrete Exposed to Soils Containing Soluble Sulfate

Sulfate Exposure

Water Soluble Sulfate (SO4)

in Soil (% by Weight)

Sulfate (SO4)

in Water (ppm)

Cement Type

(ASTM C150)

Maximum Water-Cement

Ratio (by Weight)

Minimum Compressive

Strength (psi)

Negligible 0.00 - 0.10 0-150 -- -- 2,500

Moderate 0.10 - 0.20 150-1,500 II 0.50 4,000

Severe 0.20 - 2.00 1,500-10,000 V 0.45 4,500

Very Severe Over 2.00 Over 10,000 V plus pozzolan or slag 0.45 4,500

Use of alternate combinations of cementitious materials may be permitted if the combinations meet design recommendations contained in American Concrete Institute guideline ACI 318-11. Our testing also indicates that there is a very low soluble chloride content (21 to 24 mg/kg) in the onsite soils; therefore, no special protection of reinforcing steel should be required due to soil conditions. The soils were also tested for soil reactivity (pH) and minimum electrical resistivity (ohm-cm). The test results indicate that the on-site soils have a pH in the range of 8.5 to 8.7 and a minimum electrical resistivity in the range of 1,900 to 3,070 ohm-cm. A neutral or non-corrosive soil has a pH value ranging from approximately 6 to 8.4. Generally, soils that could be considered moderately corrosive to ferrous metals have minimum resistivity values of about 3,000 ohm-cm to 10,000 ohm-cm. Soils with minimum resistivity values less than 3,000 ohm-cm can be considered corrosive and soils with minimum resistivity values less than 1,000 ohm-cm can be considered extremely corrosive. In any case, buried metal conduits should have a protective coating in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. A corrosion specialist should be consulted if more detailed recommendations are required.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 13

3.12 Pavement Sections

The sub-grade Resistance values (R-values) of four near-surface soil samples obtained along the project alignment were determined in accordance with CT 301. The results of these tests indicate the subgrade R-value ranges from 26 to 53 (see Figures B2 through B5 in Appendix B). Based on these test results, a subgrade R-value of 30 is recommended for design purposes. The asphalt concrete (AC) over Class 2 Aggregate Base (AB) structural section recommendations given herein were developed using the procedures outlined in Chapter 630 of the California Highway Design Manual. The design procedure is based on the principle that the pavement structural section must be of adequate thickness to distribute the load from the design Traffic Index (TI) to the subgrade soils in such a manner that the stresses from the applied loads do not exceed the strength of the soil (R-value). Recommended minimum structural sections for various TI's are given below:

Design TI Recommended Pavement Section (Subgrade R-value = 30)

10.5 6.5” AC over 15.5” Class 2 AB

11.0 6.5” AC over 16.5” Class 2 AB As an alternative to constructing a standard AC pavement section as recommended above, the upper 8 inches of subgrade could be treated with cement or selective grading could be performed so that the upper 12 inches of subgrade has an R-value of at least 50. Both of these options would allow the required AB thickness to be reduced as indicated in the following table.

Design TI Recommended Pavement Section

With 8" of Cement-Treated Subgrade 12" of Subgrade R-value = 50

10.5 6.5” AC over 6.0” Class 2 AB 6.5” AC over 8.0” Class 2 AB

11.0 6.5” AC over 16.5” Class 2 AB 6.5” AC over 9.0” Class 2 AB

Our experience with the type of soils that are present at the project site (silty sand with minor to no clay) indicates that if the subgrade is treated with approximately 4 percent cement, a 7-day compressive strength of at least 400 psi can be achieved. Although more sampling and testing would have to be done to verify this prior to construction, this could be used for cost-estimating purposes. Performing selective grading so that the upper 12 inches of subgrade consists of a soil or subbase with an R-value of at least 50 is normally cost effective when a significant amount of imported fill is required to construct the planned roadway improvements. In addition, this option takes advantage of existing subgrade soils that have an R-value of at least 50, such as those that were encountered at Boring B-7 (See Figure B4). However, this material would require additional R-value tests be performed during construction to verify the upper 12 inches of subgrade has a minimum R-value of 50 prior to placing the AB layer. Prior to paving, the subgrade should be prepared in accordance with the Section 3.02 of this report. All aggregate base courses should be moisture conditioned to within 2% of optimum moisture content and

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 14

compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. The AC mix design(s) and installation requirements should be specified by the Project Civil Engineer. 3.13 Plan Review

Once formal grading and roadway plans are prepared for the subject project, this office should review the plans from a geotechnical viewpoint and provide updated geotechnical recommendations, if applicable. 3.14 Geotechnical Observation and Testing During Grading

The geotechnical engineer should be contacted to provide observation and testing during the following stages of grading:

• During the clearing and grubbing of the site.

• During the demolition of any existing structures, buried utilities or other existing improvements.

• During excavation and over-excavation of existing subgrade.

• During all phases of grading including ground preparation and filling operations.

• When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading. Testing and inspection reports that describe conditions encountered during grading and the in-place density testing that is performed will be prepared during the earthwork construction associated with this project. 3.15 Post-Grading Geotechnical Observation and Testing

After the completion of grading, the geotechnical engineer should be contacted to provide additional observation and testing during the following construction activities:

• During trenching and backfilling operations of buried improvements and utilities to verify proper backfill and compaction of the utility trenches.

• After excavation and prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete within foundation excavations to verify that foundations are properly founded in competent materials.

• During fine or precise grading involving the placement of any fills underlying driveways, sidewalks, walkways, or other miscellaneous concrete flatwork to verify proper placement, mixing and compaction of fills.

• When any unusual ground or soil conditions are encountered during construction.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 15

4.0 Closure

The findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering and geologic principles and practices. No other warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. This report has been prepared for Peters Engineering Group to be used for the design and construction of the planned improvements as described above and at the location indicated on Figures 1, 2A, and 2B. Anyone using this report for any other purpose must draw their own conclusions regarding required construction procedures and subsurface conditions. The geotechnical and geologic consultant should be retained during the earthwork and foundation phases of construction to monitor compliance with the design concepts and recommendations and to provide additional recommendations as needed. Should subsurface conditions be encountered during construction that are different from those described in this report, this office should be notified immediately so that our recommendations may be re-evaluated.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page 16

FIGURES

Scale: 1" ≈ 860'FIGURE 1

SITE VICINITY MAPCartmill Avenue Improvements

from Road 100 to De La Vina Street Tulare, California 93274 Project #17H‐0152‐0

Site

Peters Engineering Group

BORING LOCATIONS

Tulare, California

CARTMILL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS

Figure 1

Figure 2ABoring Location Map

Cartmill Avenue Improvementsfrom Akers Street to De La Vina Street

Tulare, CA 93274RMA Project #17H-0152-0

Figure 2A

0 50 100 200

1" ≈ 50'

Station Plan Prepared by: Peters Engineering Group, 10/25/17

B-1

B-2

B-3B-4

Peters Engineering Group

BORING LOCATIONS

Tulare, California

CARTMILL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS

Figure 2

Figure 2BBoring Location Map

Cartmill Avenue Improvements from Akers Street to De La Vina Street

Tulare, CA 93274RMA Project #17H-0152-0

Figure 2B

0 50 100 200

1" ≈ 50'

Station Plan Prepared by: Peters Engineering Group, 10/25/17

B-5B-6

B-7B-8

B-9

APPENDIX A

FIELD INVESTIGATION

APPENDIX A

FIELD INVESTIGATION

A-1.01 Number of Borings

Our subsurface investigation consisted of excavating nine borings with a CME 75 drill rig equipped with 7-inch diameter hollow stem auger to a maximum depth of 21 feet below existing grade on July 21, 2017. A-1.02 Location of Borings

A Boring Location Map showing the approximate locations of the test borings is presented as Figures 2A and 2B. GPS coordinates indicated on the logs are based on information provided by Theodolite Version 5.0 run on an iPhone 5s with iOS Version 10.3.3. A-1.03 Boring Logging

Logs of the borings were prepared by one of our staff and are attached in this appendix. The logs contain factual information and interpretation of subsurface conditions between samples. The strata indicated on these logs represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The logs show subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. Identification of the soils encountered during the subsurface exploration was made using the field identification procedure of the Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D2488). A legend defining the terms used in describing the relative compaction, consistency or firmness of the soil is included in this appendix. Bag or tube samples of the major earth units were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page A - 1

I. SOIL STRENGTH/DENSITY

BASED ON STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS

Compactness of sand Consistency of clay

Penetration Resistance N (blows/Ft)

Compactness

Penetration Resistance N (blows/ft)

Consistency

0-4 4-10 10-30 30-50 >50

Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense

<2 2-4 4-8

8-15 15-30 >30

Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Hard

N = Number of blows of 140 lb. weight falling 30 in. to drive 2-in OD sampler 1 ft.

BASED ON RELATIVE COMPACTION

Compactness of sand Consistency of clay

% Compaction Compactness % Compaction Consistency

<75 75-83 83-90 >90

Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense

<80 80-85 85-90 >90

Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff

II. SOIL MOISTURE

Moisture of sands Moisture of clays

% Moisture Description % Moisture Description

<5% 5-12% >12%

Dry Moist Very Moist

<12% 12-20% >20%

Dry Moist Very Moist, wet

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page A - 2

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

5

10

15

25

30

35

20

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-3

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-11 1

July 21, 2017

T

T

S

S

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 18.5'2. No Groundwater Encountered3. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings

S

36.23995°, -119.33982°

8

10

12

3

11

CL

SM

Dark brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

. . .fine grained with minor clay

. . .increasing sand content

Brown, SILTY CLAY, moist, soft. . .stiff

20.4

7.0

97.3

106.1

STA 11+30, 60' R

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

2.5

5

7.5

12.5

15

17.5

10

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-4

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-21 1

July 21, 2017

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 11'2. Hand auger used to 4.5' to clear utilities 3. No Groundwater Encountered4. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings5. Patched with an AC cold mix

T

S

36.24022°, -119.33773°

S

7.5" AC over 7.5" AB

Dark brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist

. . .medium dense, with caliche

. . .fine to coarse, increasing sand content

10

17

9

SM13.5 111.2

STA 17+50, 50' R

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

2.5

5

7.5

12.5

15

17.5

10

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-5

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-31 1

July 21, 2017

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 11'2. No Groundwater Encountered3. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings

T

S

T

36.24041°, -119.33577°

16

11

17

SM

Dark brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

10.2

8.1

108.5

105.1

STA 23+80, 5' R

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

2.5

5

7.5

12.5

15

17.5

10

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-6

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-41 1

July 21, 2017

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 11'2. Hand auger used to 4.5' to clear utilities 3. No Groundwater Encountered4. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings5. Patched with an AC cold mix

T

S

36.24020°, -119.33361°

S

4" AC over 9" AB

12

8

10

SP

SM

Dark brown, fine SILTY SAND, moist, with asphalt fragments in the upper 2'

. . .medium dense

. . .fine to medium grained, increasing sand content

Yellow brown, fine to coarse SAND, moist, medium dense

2.9 106.9

STA 29+85, 30' R

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

5

10

15

25

30

35

20

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-7

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-51 1

July 21, 2017

S

S

S

T

T

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 21'2. No Groundwater Encountered3. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings

36.24051°, -119.33128°

16

10

21

29

14

SM

Dark brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

. . .increasing sand content

. . .increasing fines, with clay

11.2

6.3

115.2

106.4

STA 36+40, 15' L

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

2.5

5

7.5

12.5

15

17.5

10

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-8

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-61 1

July 21, 2017

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 11'2. Hand auger used to 4.5' to clear utilities 3. No Groundwater Encountered4. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings5. Patched with an AC cold mix

S

S

36.24039°, -119.32844°

T

8" AC over 6" AB

4

20

9

SP

SM

Dark brown, fine SILTY SAND, moist

. . .loose

Yellow brown, fine to medium SAND with minor silt, moist, medium dense

STA 44+80, 7' L

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

2.5

5

7.5

12.5

15

17.5

10

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-9

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-71 1

July 21, 2017

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 11'2. No Groundwater Encountered3. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings

T

S

T

36.24024°, -119.32637°

S

19

8

7

34

SP

SM

Dark brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

Yellow brown, fine to medium SAND with minor silt, moist, medium dense

. . .light yellow brown, fine to coarse, decreasing silt content

. . .dense

9.2

3.5

113.3

96.9

STA 50+60, 35' R

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

2.5

5

7.5

12.5

15

17.5

10

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-10

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-81 1

July 21, 2017

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 13.5'2. No Groundwater Encountered3. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings4. Patched with an AC cold mix

S

T

S

36.24042°, -119.32423°

S

4.5" AC over 7" AB

17

12

8

7

SM

SP

SM

Dark brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

. . .fine to coarse grained, with fine gravel, increasing sand content

Yellow brown, fine to coarse SAND with minor silt, moist, medium dense

Brown, fine to medium SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

5.3 112.3

STA 58+00, 2' L

Material DescriptionSamples

Dep

th(f

t)

Sam

ple

Typ

e

Blo

ws

(blo

ws/

ft)

Bul

kS

ampl

e

Moi

stur

eC

onte

nt(%

)

Dry

Den

sity

(pcf

)

US

CS This log contains factual information and interpretation of the subsurface conditions between the

samples. The stratum indicated on this log represent the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The log show subsurface conditions at the date and location indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times.

Gra

phic

Sym

bol

5

10

15

25

30

35

20

Date Drilled:

Logged By:

Location:

Drilling Equipment:

Borehole Diameter:

Drive Weights:

Exploratory Boring Log

MJS

140 lbs. (Autohammer)See Boring Location Map

Boring No.Sheet of

Drop Height: 30"

- Groundwater

- End of Boring

S

T

- SPT Sample

- Modified California Tube Sample

- Bulk Sample

Sample Types: Symbols:*NoteAll blow counts associated with Modified California Sample

are uncorrected. The sampler dimensions are as follows:ID = 2.5" OD = 3"

R - Ring Sample

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS

Cartmill Avenue Improvements Tulare, California

RMA Project No.: 17H-0152-0Page A-11

Geographic Position:

CME 75, Hollow Stem Auger

7"

B-91 1

July 21, 2017

S

T

S

T

Notes:1. Boring terminated at 16'2. No Groundwater Encountered3. Boring backfilled with soil cuttings

36.24066°, -119.32191°

21

11

12

13

SM

Dark brown, fine SILTY SAND, moist, medium dense

. . .increasing sand content

6.8

9.8

116.9

105.3

STA 63+90', 55' L

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTS

APPENDIX B

B-1.00 LABORATORY TESTS

B-1.01 Moisture Determination

The moisture content of tube and ring samples obtained from the test borings was determined in accordance with ASTM D2216, the standard method for determining the water content of soil using a drying oven. The mass of material remaining after oven drying is used as the mass of the solid particles. The results of these tests are provided on the boring logs in Appendix A. B-1.02 Density of Tube Samples

The densities of tube and ring samples, which were obtained using a split-barrel sampler, were determined in accordance with ASTM D2937. The results of these tests are provided on the boring logs in Appendix A. B-1.03 Soluble Sulfates and Chlorides

Tests were performed in accordance with California Test Methods 417 and 422 on two near-surface soil sample obtained during the field exploration. These tests were performed by Dellavalle Laboratory, Inc. located in Fresno, California. The test results are provided below in Table B1. B-1.04 Soil Reactivity (pH) and Minimum Electrical Resistivity

Two near-surface soil samples were tested for soil reactivity (pH) and minimum electrical resistivity using California Test Method 643 (see Table B1). The pH measurement determines the degree of acidity or alkalinity in the soils. The minimum electrical resistivity is used as an indicator of how corrosive the soil is relative to buried metallic items. B-1.05 Percent Passing #200 Sieve

Nine soil samples were tested in accordance with ASTM D1140 to determine the percent passing the #200 sieve (see Table B2). This represents the amount of silt and clay that is present in the soil. B-1.06 Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content

The maximum density - optimum moisture relationship was determined using the standard procedures of ASTM D1557 for a representative soil sample obtained during the field exploration. The results of the tests are shown on Figure B1. B-1.07 Resistance Value

Four Resistance Value (R-value) tests were performed on representative samples of subgrade obtained from the project alignment using test methods outlined in CTM 301 (see Figures B2 - B5).

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page B-1

TABLE B1: Summary of pH and Minimum Resistivity Test Results

Sample Location

Soluble Sulfates (mg/kg)

Soluble Chlorides (mg/kg)

pH Minimum Resistivity (ohm-cm)

B-3 @ 1’ – 3’ 126.0 24.0 8.5 1,900 B-7 @ 1’ – 3’ 68.5 21.0 8.7 3,070

TABLE B2: PERCENT PASSING #200 SIEVE TEST RESULTS

Sample Location

Dry Weight Before Wash

(grams)

Dry Weight After Wash

(grams)

Percent Passing #200 Sieve

B-1 @ 1’ – 3’ 197.8 117.9 40 B-2 @ 1’ – 3’ 190.9 108.2 43 B-3 @ 1’ – 3’ 189.3 106.5 44 B-4 @ 1’ – 3’ 220.8 180.2 18 B-5 @ 1’ – 3’ 266.0 159.1 40 B-6 @ 1’ – 3’ 210.7 124.4 41 B-7 @ 1’ – 3’ 211.4 157.7 25 B-8 @ 1’ – 3’ 215.9 171.6 21 B-9 @ 1’ – 3’ 194.8 123.3 37

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page B-2

1 2 3 4Weight of Moist Specimen & Mold, gm 3989.3 4097.8 4100.1 4034.5Weight of Compaction Mold, gm 1987.5 1987.5 1987.5 1987.5Weight of Moist Specimen, gm 2001.8 2110.3 2112.6 2047.0Volume of mold, cu. ft. 0.0333 0.0333 0.0333 0.0333Wet Density, lbs/cu.ft. 132.5 139.7 139.9 135.5Weight of Wet (Moisture) Sample, gm 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Weight of Dry (Moisture) Sample, gm 94.8 92.9 91.1 89.5Moisture Content, % 5.5% 7.6% 9.8% 11.7%Dry Density, lbs/cu.ft. 125.6 129.8 127.4 121.3

Rammer: Mechanical / ManualSpecimen Prep. Mass: 2500 gm

Figure B1Laboratory Test Form | ASTM D 1557

B: 3/8” sieve < 25% oversize. 4” MoldA: No.4 sieve < 25% oversize. 4” Mold

C: 3/4” sieve < 30% oversize. 6” MoldPreparation: Dry / Moist

Method

Test Method A

135

140

145

150MaximumDry Density, 

pcfOptimumWater 

Content, %

7.8129.9

<1%<1% <1%Oversize Fraction, %

Sieve Size No.4 3/8" 3/4"

Project Number: 17H-0152-0/01Lab ID:17-0480-MDate Tested:07/28/17Tested By: MS Curve No.: 1

Description: Silty Sand, Fine to Medium Grained, Dark Brown

Project Name:Cartmill Avenue Improvements

B-5 @ 1' - 3'Sample location:

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Dry

Den

sity

, lb

s/c.

u.f

t.

Moisture Content, % of Dry Weight

Sample Description:

SPECIMEN A B CEXUDATION PRESSURE, LOAD (lb) 4705 2458 1880EXUDATION PRESSURE, PSI 375 196 150EXPANSION, * 0.0001 IN 0.0029 0.0016 0.0003EXPANSION PRESSURE, PSF 0.013 0.007 0.001STABILOMETER PH AT 2000 LBS 53 92 112DISPLACEMENT 5.42 5.9 5.95

48 24 1544 24 17

12.8 13.7 14.7DRY DENSITY AT TEST, PCF 121.5 118.9 116.0

"R" VALUE BY EXPANSION

Silty Sand, Fine to Medium Grained, Dark Brown

17H-0152-0/0117-0480-M7/21/2017

Figure B2Laboratory Test Form | ASTM D2844

Resistance "R-Value" and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soil

37

N/APRESSURE TI = 4.0, GF=1.50

RESISTANCE VALUE "R"

Cartmill Avenue Improvements

MJS

8/22/2017SMB-1 @ 1' - 3'

% MOISTURE AT TEST

"R" VALUE AT 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE

"R" VALUE CORRECTED FOR HEIGHT

Project Number: Lab ID: Sample Date:Sampled By:

Project Name: Test Date:Tested By:Sample location:

COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE, INCHES

"R" V

ALU

E

CO

VER

TH

ICKN

ESS

BY S

TABI

LOM

ETE

R,

INC

HES

EXUDATION PRESSURE,

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

241203045060780 0

Sample Description:

SPECIMEN A B CEXUDATION PRESSURE, LOAD (lb) 4301 3458 2097EXUDATION PRESSURE, PSI 342 275 167EXPANSION, * 0.0001 IN 0.0020 0.0017 0.0009EXPANSION PRESSURE, PSF 0.009 0.007 0.004STABILOMETER PH AT 2000 LBS 87 98 104DISPLACEMENT 5.22 5.10 5.49

29 24 2029 24 20

11.4 11.8 12.3DRY DENSITY AT TEST, PCF 126.0 124.8 123.3

"R" VALUE BY EXPANSION

Lab ID: Sample Date:Sampled By:

Project Name: Test Date:Tested By:Sample location:

% MOISTURE AT TEST

"R" VALUE AT 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE

"R" VALUE CORRECTED FOR HEIGHT

Project Number:

MJS

8/21/2017SMB-3 @ 1' - 3'

Silty Sand, Fine to Medium Grained, Dark Brown

17H-0152-0/0117-0480-M7/21/2017

Figure B3Laboratory Test Form | ASTM D2844

Resistance "R-Value" and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soil

26

N/APRESSURE TI = 4.0, GF=1.50

RESISTANCE VALUE "R"

Cartmill Avenue Improvements

COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE, INCHES

"R" V

ALU

E

CO

VER

TH

ICKN

ESS

BY S

TABI

LOM

ETE

R,

INC

HES

EXUDATION PRESSURE,

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

241203045060780 0

Sample Description:

SPECIMEN A B CEXUDATION PRESSURE, LOAD (lb) 5366 3106 1704EXUDATION PRESSURE, PSI 427 247 136EXPANSION, * 0.0001 IN 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000EXPANSION PRESSURE, PSF 0.0009 0.0000 0.0000STABILOMETER PH AT 2000 LBS 34 55 96DISPLACEMENT 4.1 4.98 4.76

69 49 2668 46 278.7 9.6 10.5

DRY DENSITY AT TEST, PCF 129.7 130.5 128.4

"R" VALUE BY EXPANSION

Lab ID: Sample Date:Sampled By:

Project Name: Test Date:Tested By:Sample location:

% MOISTURE AT TEST

"R" VALUE AT 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE

"R" VALUE CORRECTED FOR HEIGHT

Project Number:

MJS

8/21/2017SMB-7 @ 1' - 3'

Silty Sand, Fine to Medium Grained, Dark Brown

17H-0152-0/0117-0480-M7/21/2017

Figure B4Laboratory Test Form | ASTM D2844

Resistance "R-Value" and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soil

53

N/APRESSURE TI = 4.0, GF=1.50

RESISTANCE VALUE "R"

Cartmill Avenue Improvements

COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE, INCHES

"R" V

ALU

E

CO

VER

TH

ICKN

ESS

BY S

TABI

LOM

ETE

R,

INC

HES

EXUDATION PRESSURE,

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

241203045060780 0

Sample Description:

SPECIMEN A B CEXUDATION PRESSURE, LOAD (lb) 7973 4016 1228EXUDATION PRESSURE, PSI 635 320 98EXPANSION, * 0.0001 IN 0.0018 0.0014 0EXPANSION PRESSURE, PSF 0.008 0.006 0.000STABILOMETER PH AT 2000 LBS 36 74 119DISPLACEMENT 4.02 5.64 5.27

68 34 1468 34 149.0 10.8 12.6

DRY DENSITY AT TEST, PCF 129.8 127.6 122.8

"R" VALUE BY EXPANSION

Lab ID: Sample Date:Sampled By:

Project Name: Test Date:Tested By:Sample location:

% MOISTURE AT TEST

"R" VALUE AT 300 PSI EXUDATION PRESSURE

"R" VALUE CORRECTED FOR HEIGHT

Project Number:

MJS

8/24/2017SMB-9 @ 1' - 3'

Silty Sand, Fine Grained, Dark Brown

17H-0152-0/0117-0480-M7/21/2017

Figure B5Laboratory Test Form | ASTM D2844

Resistance "R-Value" and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soil

32

N/APRESSURE TI = 4.0, GF=1.50

RESISTANCE VALUE "R"

Cartmill Avenue Improvements

COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE, INCHES

"R" V

ALU

E

CO

VER

TH

ICKN

ESS

BY S

TABI

LOM

ETE

R,

INC

HES

EXUDATION PRESSURE,

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

241203045060780 0

APPENDIX C

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

1. 2016 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2013.

2. Bartow, J. A. (1991). The Cenozoic evolution of the San Joaquin Valley, California (No. 1501).

3. Bailey, E. H., Irwin, W. P., and Jones, D. L. (1964). Franciscan and related rocks and their significance in the geology of western California (Vol. 183). California Division of Mines and Geology.

4. California Department of Water Resources, Groundwater Information Center Interactive Map Application https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/gicima/ and Groundwater Level Monitoring Website: http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/data_and_monitoring/levels.cfm

5. Caltrans Standard Specifications, 2015 edition.

6. Harden, D.R. 2004. California Geology. 2nd ed. Pearson-Prentice Hall.

7. Hammond, W. C., Blewitt, G., Li, Z., Plag, H. P., & Kreemer, C. (2012). Contemporary uplift of the Sierra Nevada, western United States, from GPS and InSAR measurements. Geology, 40(7), 667-670.

8. Irwin, W. P. (1990). Geology and plate-tectonic development. The San Andreas Fault System, California, 1515, 61-80.

9. Page, R. W. (1986). Geology of the fresh ground-water basin of the Central Valley, California: with texture maps and sections. US Government Printing Office.

10. U.S. Geological Survey, 2011, Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, Version 5.0.10, ASCE 7 Standard, htpp://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/

11. Wakabayashi, J. (1992). Nappes, tectonics of oblique plate convergence, and metamorphic evolution related to 140 million years of continuous subduction, Franciscan Complex, California. The Journal of Geology, 100(1), 19-40.

12. Wakabayashi, J. (2011). Mélanges of the Franciscan Complex, California: Diverse structural settings, evidence for sedimentary mixing, and their connection to subduction processes. Geological Society of America Special Papers, 480, 117-141.

Cartmill Avenue Improvements November 15, 2017 Tulare, California Project No.: 17H-0152-0 Page C-1